Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Bryan Kohberger Fights to Move Idaho Student Murders Trial
Episode Date: July 30, 2024Bryan Kohberger's lawyers have filed a brief with the court detailing why they believe his trial should be moved out of Latah County, Idaho for the murders of four University of Idaho student...s. Kohberger's team hired a consultant to conduct a survey of residents in Latah County to see how they viewed Kohberger and the case. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy details Kohberger's reasons for wanting the trial moved in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/CrimeFixHost:Angenette Levy https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest: Andy Wilson https://www.linkedin.com/in/andy-wilson-ab9823296/CRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@LawandCrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Transcript
Discussion (0)
Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now.
Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.
Our defense team firmly, and I mean firmly, believes in Mr. Koberger's innocence.
And right now he's being held to have a trial in a county that believes that he is guilty.
Brian Koberger is making his case for why he thinks his trial for the murders of four
University of Idaho students should be moved out of Latah County.
I lay out what Koberger's arguing months ahead of his scheduled trial and why he says he
can't get a fair shake in Moscow.
Welcome to Crime Fix.
I'm Anjanette Levy.
Brian Coburger's trial is scheduled to begin
in June of 2025.
That's about 10 months from now.
The prosecution has been clear.
They wanna keep the trial in Latah County,
where those four University of Idaho students,
Maddie Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves, Ethan Chapin,
and Zanna Kurnodal were murdered in their home off campus in November of
2022. Koberger has maintained he did not break into the home on King Road and stabbed those
four students. He's essentially claimed that he was a patsy and that law enforcement was under
pressure to make a quick arrest. We've known for some time now that Koberger would ask that his
trial be moved, but now his attorneys have actually filed a brief laying out why they say he can't get a fair trial in Latah County.
On page one, his lawyers wrote, Brian Koberger cannot receive a fair trial in Latah County as
protected by his rights under both the United States and Idaho constitutions because of the
pervasive, inflammatory, often inaccurate
and highly prejudicial publicity and the small size of the jury veneer.
The brief includes a number of exhibits, including press releases from Moscow police throughout
the investigation in November and December of 2022 when police were trying to find the
killer.
Those documents include photos of a white Hyundai Elantra that law enforcement says was seen at the King Road house when the murders were committed. Brian Koberger
drove a similar vehicle. We've seen it in body camera footage of traffic stops. Koberger's
attorneys write, daily updates were available from Moscow Police Department. Often participating in
the updates or press releases was the Latah County prosecutor
and chief of police James Fry these broadcasts were played on television news stations as well
as print and digital media social media covered the investigation with MPD updating its Facebook
page and providing press releases and media statements regularly coberger's lawyers say
that was the beginning of the poisoning of the jury pool against
their client.
Koberger's team claims things only got worse once he was charged with the murders.
Immediately and consistently, the internet was abuzz with podcasts, tweets, Facebook
groups, Reddit, YouTube, and TikTok postings.
Once the police arrested Mr. Koberger, the public was ready to, and has, proceeded to vilify him without regard to the constitutional guarantee of the presumption of innocence and a right to an impartial jury and fair trial.
The media focus on Mr. Koberger has been relentless and highly inflammatory.
You can't really argue that this case has grabbed the attention of people around the world.
It was being discussed all
over social media and there was legitimate fear in Moscow I know because I was there and people
everywhere could relate to the case maybe they'd been to college and lived in a similar house as
the four victims or they could envision those victims being their own family members the
murders happened nearly two years ago now and by the time the case goes to trial,
it will be going on three years. These are all things that judge-judge will have to weigh.
Coburger's lawyers write, the determination of whether to grant a motion for change of venue
is addressed to the discretion of the trial court. The defense continues, writing, prejudice may be
properly presumed when either an inflammatory publicity about a case has
so saturated a community that it is almost impossible to draw an impartial jury from that
community, or B, so many jurors admit to a disqualifying prejudice that the trial court
may legitimately doubt the evals of impartiality made by the remaining jurors. State v. Koberger
is an extreme case in the atmosphere
Latah County is utterly corrupted by press coverage requiring a change of venue. The defense
hired a trial consultant to conduct a survey of potential jurors. It was really a way to take the
temperature in Latah County. The survey led to a couple of fiery hearings last spring with Dr. Brian Adelman, who reached out to potential jurors in Latah County.
You acknowledge false that Mr. Kober allegedly stalked one of the victims. That's false. You know that to be false.
Which one?
That Mr. Kober allegedly stalked one of the victims.
Yes, I was trying not to say that.
But you knew that was false.
I did.
The information that was put in the survey is based on the public record and information
the way that state and state actors put information into the public record that has now been
disseminated.
And we have not violated that order.
And I do resent being accused of that. Judge Judge eventually allowed the defense
to continue that survey. Now the defense writes in its brief, Latah County citizens who are over
the age of 18 are biased and have knowledge of information that is inflammatory, misleading,
and or false about this case. The Community Attitude Survey shows case recognition
is 98%. 70% of those recognizing the case have already formed an opinion regarding Mr. Koberger.
Their opinion is that he is guilty. The defense continues. 81% of those familiar with the case
had read, seen, or heard that police found a knife sheath on the
bed next to one of the victims, and 67% were aware that DNA found on the sheath was matched
to Brian Koberger. The defense says three other counties were surveyed by Dr. Edelman,
and people in those counties had similar views on Brian Koberger's guilt, but the defense said
people in those counties had fewer personal connections to
the case and they don't follow the media as closely. It is noteworthy that outside of
Latah County, the incidence of fear associated with the case is significantly reduced. The defense
then broke down the numbers, claiming 25,000 people are eligible for jury service out of the
41,000 in Latah County because some people
aren't eligible because they're under 18 or might ask to be excused because they're older than 70.
The defense also points out that 4,500 people in the community are employed by the University of
Idaho and 300 work in law enforcement, the courts, or in the jail, which makes the jury pool even smaller.
Interestingly enough, the defense wants the trial moved to Ada County, where Boise is located. It's
a larger county than Latah, 12 times the size. That's where the trials of Chad Daybell and Lori
Vallow were held in the last year. Those trials were both moved to Ada County from smaller counties, and both were
still convicted. The defense also argues that jurors from Latah County will basically not have
any anonymity. Everyone will know who they are because it's a small town, and one of the defense's
jury consultants says that will make the pressure to reach a guilty verdict even greater. The Ada
County Courthouse can accommodate this trial the defense
writes there are large courtrooms with adequate space and tables for the attorneys and mr coberger
the large courtroom provides space for each council to keep materials and necessary conversation
out of eyesight or earshot of the other party spectators and the media there are multiple
jury rooms and many private
restrooms away from the public to accommodate a large jury for several months. The courthouse
and security are set up to assist jurors to and from the courtroom without media exposure.
Dr. Edelman testified in April during a hearing in which he defended his work.
He discussed then what he was finding in his survey of Latah County.
What we found is that, like I said, very high recognition rates. So 79% of respondents knew at least five of these items. So the idea that we're undermining his due process rights,
everybody knows all this stuff. Very high rates. 82% of respondents who recognize seven of these
items or more reported that he's guilty compared to if they only knew two or fewer, only 29%
thought he was guilty. And the average was 6.2. The average number of these details,
people already know, 6.2. Unfortunately, the world is not always a safe place. And when
accidents happen, you may need an attorney that's going to fight for you and stand up for your rights.
That's why I want to tell you about Morgan & Morgan, a sponsor of Crime Fix.
Morgan & Morgan has more than a thousand attorneys that you may want in your corner because they are America's largest injury law firm.
And for a good reason, they win a lot.
And when I say a lot, I mean they win a lot. Morgan & Morgan has won
several multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements recently for victims who were in
life-altering car crashes, all of which were considerably higher than the highest insurance
company offer. Starting a claim takes eight clicks or less, and it can all be done from
your smartphone. And there are no upfront fees. You only pay Morgan and Morgan if you win so if you're
injured you can easily start a claim in eight clicks or less at for the people.com slash crime
fix Andy Wilson has prosecuted many high profile homicide cases Andy I want to hear your thoughts
on Brian coberger's brief for a change of venue so So thank you, Anjanette. Obviously, the judge in this case
is going to make a decision on this motion that best serves the interests of justice. And our
system, a lot of times that is, you know, obviously goes in favor of the defendant. However, you know,
there are other considerations when you look at a change of venue motion that a judge has to look
at. And you have to take, when you're looking at the overall venue motion that a judge has to look at.
And you have to take, when you're looking at the overall interest of justice,
you have to take in consideration the interest of the community and the interest of the victims.
And there is a strong or should be a strong presumption that a case should be decided in the community where the crime happened.
It should be judged by the beliefs,
the norms, the values of that community. And a lot of times what you see in a change of venue motion
is not so much getting it out of the community, but actually kind of forum shopping.
And you have a little bit of that here in so much as, look, they want to move this to Boise.
And when you look at, you know, obviously that's 300 miles away, about 300 miles away.
But it's not just the distance. It's the potential jury pool that the defendant is trying to get this case to.
So obviously a jury pool that is made up of citizens of a community of 500,000, their beliefs, their norms,
their values are going to be different than a community that's made up of 41,000 right around
there. So you can see, again, obviously the judge has to make the decision that's in the best
interest of justice, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it has to be moved. It
certainly doesn't have to be moved to Boise. So, you know, I looked at the survey, you know,
they're relying on Dr. Edelman's survey that he did. You know, that is somewhat instructive,
but that shouldn't be dispositive of whether or not this motion should be granted.
I would think, though, that Moscow, it's a small town. I was there. It's a college town.
It is a small county. And you know what it's like to try a high profile case in a small county. You
did George Wagner IV's trial. You were part of that prosecution team in Pike County, Ohio.
That's an even smaller county. They used a local jury. It took forever to pick that jury because it was a death qualified jury,
much like this one would be. But everybody, you are going to be hard pressed to find anybody in
Latah County that doesn't know anything about this or have an opinion about it. And I know
the question is, Andy, the question always is, can you set that aside and decide the case based on the evidence in the courtroom?
But this is a case that has received an unprecedented amount of attention, both in traditional media and on social media.
And people have very strong feelings about it.
I mean, there are people out there that think Brian Koberger, for as many as think that he is guilty and many do there are people
out there that think he's innocent so do you think that that factors in the fact that this is a case
that has grabbed headlines around the world and still people are engaged in discussion about this
on social media on a daily basis right so the fact that you know about a case or heard about a case, even the fact that you may have an opinion about the case, that alone doesn't disqualify you from being a juror.
It's whether or not you have prejudged the guilt or the not guilt or innocence of the defendant based on information you've got outside the courtroom. So what's interesting,
again, the best practice without a doubt that I found, and again, I've tried a lot of pretty
high profile cases, a lot of murder cases, is to bring the potential jury before the judge
and have the judge instruct them on the law, instruct them on the presumption of innocence instruct them that that defendant has
no burden of proof that the the only evidence that they would be able to consider in the trial is
what comes from within the four walls of the courthouse i i found that jurors listened to
to the judge's instructions more than anybody else in the in the courtroom jurors listened to the judge's instructions more than anybody else in the in the courtroom jurors listen to the
judges and once you bring the jury in front of the judge and once you begin to ask them questions in
voir dire about pre-trial publicity and about whether or not they prejudge the case that's
really the best way to determine whether or not you can see the jury in in that venue you know
to do it on a on a bare motion or to do it based on survey results where there's
been no instructions of law, when there's been no chance by either of the parties to
stare the juror in the eyes, to ask the juror questions, to listen to the way the juror
responds to the answers to those questions, you know, that's just not the best way to
do it.
I think you probably ought to bring this jury or potential jury into the courtroom and try to see
them. Look, if you bring that that jury pool in and juror after juror says, look, I I've heard
too much. I've prejudged the case. And I've seen that in some of the cases that I've tried where
you'll have jurors sit down and be like, look, I believe he's guilty based on everything that I've heard.
Clearly, that juror can't sit. And if you see a pattern of that emerge, then you've got a problem.
But I don't think, again, if you're truly looking at the interest of justice for the community and for the victims,
I don't think you achieve that until you at least try that.
You try to see the jury in the venue where the crime happened.
And then if you can't do that,
then move it. I also think if you're going to move it, you should move it to a jurisdiction that geographically and demographically represents the venue where the crime happened. And again,
I just don't think Boise is the right venue for that. Ada County is certainly a much different
county than Latah County. Big county bigger it's a more metropolitan area
it's just bigger it's much different you mentioned earlier it seemed like they were forum shopping
and they've brought up ada county before where boise sits they've brought it up in hearings
before and talked about how it's got better airports you know it's just all the way all
around a better venue as far as they are concerned. It's a larger courtroom, all this stuff
that is better equipped to handle a trial of this magnitude, because it is going to be a big trial.
But we saw with the case that you were on, the Pike County case, George Wagner, the force case,
that was a case that had a bazillion exhibits. And it was still held in that tiny you know antiquated courtroom you guys
still got it done and granted it took forever but it you got it done you were able to try the case
there um you know i i was one of the people who thought maybe it should have been moved to a
larger venue even if it was still in pike county maybe like you know some place at the high school
or something like that so you think that they're basically, do you think in their survey, you
mentioned forum shopping, that they uncovered information that they felt was more favorable
to them coming out of Ada County? Look, I think anytime you have a bigger metropolitan area,
they look at crime differently.
And the potential jury pool that you're going to get out of that bigger metropolitan area, again, I think the population is about half a million people, their beliefs, their views, their values on crime and how criminals should be looked at or treated are going to be different than a smaller venue.
And again, the defense attorneys, if they wanted to just move it,
they would be okay with it moving anywhere in the state as long as it was away from Moscow.
And the fact that they're specifically asking for this metropolitan area,
again, they code it in the, well, we have bigger courthouses, better transportation, better hotels.
That's all true.
But I'm telling you, you can try high-profile cases in small courthouses.
And you can certainly get it done.
Again, the case that we handled down there in Pike County, the courthouse didn't even have an elevator in it.
But logistically, we didn't really have a an elevator in it but logistically we
didn't really have any problems in presenting the case the way it needed to be presented so so you
can make do in a smaller jurisdiction smaller venue um i just think that they're trying to get
it to a metropolitan jury jury pool let me play a devil's advocate here for a second i mean doesn't
just moving this case doesn't it moving, even though it would be a pain
probably for the state, the judge, all of these other people involved, doesn't that
kind of remove a potential appellate issue if you move it to another county where maybe
there is a bigger media market and there are more people, but maybe people aren't paying
as close attention to the case as they would be in Moscow, Idaho, and maybe they don't have the personal connections to the
people involved in the university. I mean, doesn't that just kind of fix things a little bit as far
as if you're worried about possible appeals, you think, okay, let's just move it. That's one less
thing we have to worry about down the road if there is indeed
a conviction is the fact that we had this case we held this trial here in this place where everybody
knew about this case and a lot of people had formed opinions certainly it it removes a potential
appellate issue but that should never be an excuse for actually trying to
seat a jury in the venue where the crime happened.
Again, there's an interest in that community of having crimes that happen in that community
adjudicated in that community.
There's an interest for the victims to have the crime adjudicated in the community where
their loved ones were killed, so the survivors of the victims.
So there's an interest in having it adjudicated there.
I think you do the citizens of that county a disservice
by not at least instructing them, bringing them in,
giving them the opportunity to be instructed on the law
and then look them in the eye
and ask them as whether or not they can serve, whether
or not they can set that aside. You know, I think that there is utility in at least trying to seat
the jury there first. Now, you may not get it. And if it becomes clear to the judge that you're
not going to be able to seat a panel, then yes, you have to move it and do away with that appellate
issue. But I'm telling you, when we tried Pike County, everybody we talked to, a lot of people
we talked to in the media, a lot of people that we talked to across
the state didn't think that we were going to be able to get a jury down there. And once we sat
down and actually started talking to these folks, and we did, we had some jurors. You are going to
have jurors who come in and say, look, I just can't do it. I can't be fair. I've already prejudged
the case. But when you just move it
without trying, you actually do a disservice to the citizens of that county. You're telling them,
I don't trust you to follow the law. I don't trust you to follow the judge's instructions.
So I think you need to at least give the citizens of that community the opportunity to hear that
case. Well, there's also a non-dissemination order in place, and it has been in place since
Brian Koberger was arrested, and the defense asked for that, and the prosecution agreed. So that's
limited some of the publicity in the case, but still, it's all over the internet. So it'll be
interesting to see what judge decides. I think he's inclined to keep it where it is, but the
hearing's at the end of August. Thank you so much, Andy Wilson.
You're welcome.
Thank you.
And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix.
I'm Ann Jeanette Levy.
Thanks so much for being with me.
I'll see you back here next time.